homerawayfromhome wrote:Off the top of my head, I think the Tribe could use any of James Russell, Nate Schierholtz, Kevin Gregg, Carlos Villanueva and Edwin Jackson IF the Cubs paid him this yrs salary.

I don't really see how Gregg, Jackson or Villaneuva would help. Jimenez is having a better year than both Jackson and Villaneuva (and no thanks to paying either of those guys for the rest of their contract), and there's realistically nobody among our righties that Gregg would supplant. Schierholz is interesting, but he's the kind of guy we already have two of in the corner outfield spots, I don't see how he helps. James Russell would be a good option as a LOOGY, and he has some years of control left. I'm not sure I'd give up anything substantial for him, but he's intriguing. Not really sure he's the kind of guy they're looking to give up, either.

I somewhat agree, kind of tossing out some names they would seemingly have interest in. Russell is the one I think they would gun for. Jackson and Schierholtz - the Tribe had varying levels of interest this offseason, both are obviously controllable beyond this yr. Jackson has struggled this yr, so he'd be a gamble. Gregg, I think would help deepen the pen, but that kind move would probably only come if the back end continues to struggle. Villanueva would figure to be a BOR arm IF they decide to add another arm. I think they have to, and then consider moving Kazmir to the Pen bc he's likely on an innings limit this yr. Btw, Villanueva only makes $5M, that would be cheap for a SP. I would rather have 2 yrs @ $10 M with him than Myers considering his 1 yr @ $8M cost. All of that said, the 2 I like from the Cubs are Schierholtz and Russell.

Mlbtraderumors has the Tribe talking to the Cubs RE: Garza. If the Tribe makes such a move expect them to send out some IFA pool money in the deal. The Cubs have yet to finalize the deal with Eloy Jimenez, IF they acquire about $1M they will avoid 75% tax and signing restrictions of $500K next yr in penalties. Btw, the Tribe can send 3 pool allotments for $988,100 more than enough to cover the Cubs need.

homerawayfromhome wrote:Mlbtraderumors has the Tribe talking to the Cubs RE: Garza. If the Tribe makes such a move expect them to send out some IFA pool money in the deal. The Cubs have yet to finalize the deal with Eloy Jimenez, IF they acquire about $1M they will avoid 75% tax and signing restrictions of $500K next yr in penalties. Btw, the Tribe can send 3 pool allotments for $988,100 more than enough to cover the Cubs need.

Toronto is said to be looking for a second baseman.. and have their full allotment of IFA cash.. perhaps the Indians can acquire the Jays stash, send some to the Flubs for some combination of Garza/Vogelbach, then steal Leonardo Molina and or Luis Encarnacion from the Yankees as IFA's?..

Maybe too many moving parts, not enough stuff from the Indians for this to happen..?

Edible14 wrote:The only guy on the Cubs that I'd be willing to part with pool money for is Garza, even though that would be a one-year rental. Reason being: Garza is a good enough starter that I wouldn't mind extending a qualifying offer for in the off-season. So while you'd lose out on a bit of pool money this year, you can turn it into a draft pick next year (and if he accepts that offer... then he basically takes up the money that we're paying Jimenez and Myers this year, and eliminates a big shopping need). He'd be a good short-term move, and you wouldn't be selling the future for him. Problem remains that we're not a good trading partner with the Cubs, and they'll want more than just the pool money.

Just a reminder, the Tribe nor any team other than the Cubs can extend Garza a qualifying offer. New CBA rules make it so a team must have a player for at least one full season in order to extend a qualifying offer. The Angels had this issue with Greinke this winter as they couldn't extend an offer and got no pick for him since they traded for him mid-season. I wouldn't hate getting Garza but won't be getting a draft pick and he'll cost a decent penny to get (no Lindor but would still have to give up a lot)...

Disagree a bit on the Cubs and Tribe not being good trade partners. Indians and Red Sox hooked up several times when Theo was over there. Seems to have a trade relationship with the Tribe FO. Other than Garza there are several bullpen arms (as mentioned) that could be a fit. And if Chisenhall were to struggle more...I would ask about Valbuena potentially. Been playing a solid 3B defensively (been playing well there the last 2 years) and OBP near .350. Having a very solid year for the Cubbies. BR WAR is 1.3 and his fWAR is 1.8 (it's now 3.2 the last season and a half). Cubbies probably won't want to part with him though as they seem to like him. Would make a nice platoon at 3B with Aviles/Reynolds though (again only if Chiz struggles in July). Wouldn't be a bad extra piece in a bigger deal IMO.

GeronimoSon wrote:Toronto is said to be looking for a second baseman.. and have their full allotment of IFA cash.. perhaps the Indians can acquire the Jays stash, send some to the Flubs for some combination of Garza/Vogelbach, then steal Leonardo Molina and or Luis Encarnacion from the Yankees as IFA's?..

Maybe too many moving parts, not enough stuff from the Indians for this to happen..?

Give Toronto Blake Wood?..Ubaldo?

Too unrealistic?..

The Jays are said to be looking for a 2B so we maybe send them Blake Wood or Ubaldo for their IFA cash?? Or was the Wood or Ubaldo thing separate?

Would like to get Garza/Vogelbach for IFA cash but would take a lot more than that with how Garza has been pitching. Though maybe the Tribe sent enough we'd be able to swing a deal without giving up too much in regards to specs.

homerawayfromhome wrote:Mlbtraderumors has the Tribe talking to the Cubs RE: Garza. If the Tribe makes such a move expect them to send out some IFA pool money in the deal. The Cubs have yet to finalize the deal with Eloy Jimenez, IF they acquire about $1M they will avoid 75% tax and signing restrictions of $500K next yr in penalties. Btw, the Tribe can send 3 pool allotments for $988,100 more than enough to cover the Cubs need.

Garza is definitely a name to watch with the Indians. Masterson, Garza, Kluber, McAllister, Ubaldo....with Kazmir in the pen and Carrasco/Bauer in AAA would be a nice rotation to have this summer to try and take the division. Lindor has to be off the table and maybe Paulino but the Tribe is just loaded with middle infield specs. Emergence of Wendle just adds to it. Or maybe a guy like Naquin (Cubs like David DeJesus...and IMO Naquin is very DeJesus-like). Tribe should have some specs the Cubs like, and again there is some history there with the people in their FO and ours...

GeronimoSon wrote:Toronto is said to be looking for a second baseman.. and have their full allotment of IFA cash.. perhaps the Indians can acquire the Jays stash, send some to the Flubs for some combination of Garza/Vogelbach, then steal Leonardo Molina and or Luis Encarnacion from the Yankees as IFA's?..

Maybe too many moving parts, not enough stuff from the Indians for this to happen..?

Give Toronto Blake Wood?..Ubaldo?

Too unrealistic?..

The Blue Jays have signed something like 14/16 IFA's two good ones, top 30 talents. I'm not sure how much cash they have left. But it would have to go straight to the Cubs in that kind of deal. Pool money can only be traded once.

I get the feeling the Tribe is either intentionally lurking with their pool money with either 1 of 2 intentions...1) to snag one of the younger kids they really like, but are waiting for their b-day to be eligible to sign....2) they plan on using pool money essentially trading it as a prospect in a deal or two.I expect the later, but the Tribe is usually quiet regarding transactions, so they could have several signings that they are waiting to announce.

I think there is a good chance the Tribe and Cubs match up. Maybe the Tribe can flip 3 pool allotments (almost $1M) and Nick Hagadone to the Cubs for James Russell. That would seemingly, meet some needs for both clubs. Obviously, there are rumors the Tribe and Cubs are talking Garza, that could develop into a larger trade involving pieces going both ways IF it were to go down.

homerawayfromhome wrote:Mlbtraderumors has the Tribe talking to the Cubs RE: Garza. If the Tribe makes such a move expect them to send out some IFA pool money in the deal. The Cubs have yet to finalize the deal with Eloy Jimenez, IF they acquire about $1M they will avoid 75% tax and signing restrictions of $500K next yr in penalties. Btw, the Tribe can send 3 pool allotments for $988,100 more than enough to cover the Cubs need.

Garza is definitely a name to watch with the Indians. Masterson, Garza, Kluber, McAllister, Ubaldo....with Kazmir in the pen and Carrasco/Bauer in AAA would be a nice rotation to have this summer to try and take the division. Lindor has to be off the table and maybe Paulino but the Tribe is just loaded with middle infield specs. Emergence of Wendle just adds to it. Or maybe a guy like Naquin (Cubs like David DeJesus...and IMO Naquin is very DeJesus-like). Tribe should have some specs the Cubs like, and again there is some history there with the people in their FO and ours...

I think the Cubs will look for pool money from any trade partner bc it will help them avoid penalty. As for prospects I think the Tribe might consider moving, here's a few....RRod, Tyler Naquin, Jose Ramirez, Cody Anderson, Shawn Morimando. Side note here: didn't RRod originally sign with the Cubs and then his deal was voided??? I don't remember the original story, but I think they'd have interest in him for sure. Also, the Tribe might trade those three pool allotments totaling $988,100. And on July 17th the competitive balance lottery will be held...that could be a valuable trade chip this summer.

Just name dropping here, but I'd love to see any of: Ryan Webb, Mike Dunn and Steve Chisek with Chief Wahoo on their sleeve to help reinforce the bullpen. Various rumors out there on their availability from the Marlins.

homerawayfromhome wrote:Just name dropping here, but I'd love to see any of: Ryan Webb, Mike Dunn and Steve Chisek with Chief Wahoo on their sleeve to help reinforce the bullpen. Various rumors out there on their availability from the Marlins.

That's a team I'm watching from a distance as well. All 3 of those relievers could be useful. They're not the marquee names expected to be moved but they'll get a lot of attention and net the Marlins some good assets going forward.

Dunn would really help, but with his command he is more of that second lefty, which is something Hagadone has failed to become despite excellent stuff.

I also like a few relievers from Houston, namely Wesley Wright, who's having a fine season.

Edible14 wrote:The only guy on the Cubs that I'd be willing to part with pool money for is Garza, even though that would be a one-year rental. Reason being: Garza is a good enough starter that I wouldn't mind extending a qualifying offer for in the off-season. So while you'd lose out on a bit of pool money this year, you can turn it into a draft pick next year (and if he accepts that offer... then he basically takes up the money that we're paying Jimenez and Myers this year, and eliminates a big shopping need). He'd be a good short-term move, and you wouldn't be selling the future for him. Problem remains that we're not a good trading partner with the Cubs, and they'll want more than just the pool money.

Just a reminder, the Tribe nor any team other than the Cubs can extend Garza a qualifying offer. New CBA rules make it so a team must have a player for at least one full season in order to extend a qualifying offer. The Angels had this issue with Greinke this winter as they couldn't extend an offer and got no pick for him since they traded for him mid-season. I wouldn't hate getting Garza but won't be getting a draft pick and he'll cost a decent penny to get (no Lindor but would still have to give up a lot)...

Disagree a bit on the Cubs and Tribe not being good trade partners. Indians and Red Sox hooked up several times when Theo was over there. Seems to have a trade relationship with the Tribe FO. Other than Garza there are several bullpen arms (as mentioned) that could be a fit. And if Chisenhall were to struggle more...I would ask about Valbuena potentially. Been playing a solid 3B defensively (been playing well there the last 2 years) and OBP near .350. Having a very solid year for the Cubbies. BR WAR is 1.3 and his fWAR is 1.8 (it's now 3.2 the last season and a half). Cubbies probably won't want to part with him though as they seem to like him. Would make a nice platoon at 3B with Aviles/Reynolds though (again only if Chiz struggles in July). Wouldn't be a bad extra piece in a bigger deal IMO.

I completely forgot about that. Well then... less excited about what would be a pure one year rental. And as for not being good trading partners, it's not that there's no relationship, it's that what we have in excess (middle infielders, relievers) is not what the Cubs need, with Castro being locked up for a decade and Barney young and cost-controlled. They need youth in the outfield and starting rotation. We don't have much to give, unless we're going to foist Carrasco or Bauer on them.

Edible14 wrote:The only guy on the Cubs that I'd be willing to part with pool money for is Garza, even though that would be a one-year rental. Reason being: Garza is a good enough starter that I wouldn't mind extending a qualifying offer for in the off-season. So while you'd lose out on a bit of pool money this year, you can turn it into a draft pick next year (and if he accepts that offer... then he basically takes up the money that we're paying Jimenez and Myers this year, and eliminates a big shopping need). He'd be a good short-term move, and you wouldn't be selling the future for him. Problem remains that we're not a good trading partner with the Cubs, and they'll want more than just the pool money.

Just a reminder, the Tribe nor any team other than the Cubs can extend Garza a qualifying offer. New CBA rules make it so a team must have a player for at least one full season in order to extend a qualifying offer. The Angels had this issue with Greinke this winter as they couldn't extend an offer and got no pick for him since they traded for him mid-season. I wouldn't hate getting Garza but won't be getting a draft pick and he'll cost a decent penny to get (no Lindor but would still have to give up a lot)...

Disagree a bit on the Cubs and Tribe not being good trade partners. Indians and Red Sox hooked up several times when Theo was over there. Seems to have a trade relationship with the Tribe FO. Other than Garza there are several bullpen arms (as mentioned) that could be a fit. And if Chisenhall were to struggle more...I would ask about Valbuena potentially. Been playing a solid 3B defensively (been playing well there the last 2 years) and OBP near .350. Having a very solid year for the Cubbies. BR WAR is 1.3 and his fWAR is 1.8 (it's now 3.2 the last season and a half). Cubbies probably won't want to part with him though as they seem to like him. Would make a nice platoon at 3B with Aviles/Reynolds though (again only if Chiz struggles in July). Wouldn't be a bad extra piece in a bigger deal IMO.

I completely forgot about that. Well then... less excited about what would be a pure one year rental. And as for not being good trading partners, it's not that there's no relationship, it's that what we have in excess (middle infielders, relievers) is not what the Cubs need, with Castro being locked up for a decade and Barney young and cost-controlled. They need youth in the outfield and starting rotation. We don't have much to give, unless we're going to foist Carrasco or Bauer on them.

Castro and Barney are both terrible though offensively this year. Barney is also 27 and hasn't done much, is a solid glove but really more of a utility infielder. Castro....not sure what the Cubs are gonna do with him but he is absolutely lost right now. Former All-Star so they will stick with him, but he is terrible defensively at short. Wouldn't be surprised if he's moved off eventually. Been some talks already of him potentially being a candidate for the OF. Plus, the Cubs aren't a team that's going to compete in the next year or two. They need to look 3-4 years down the line. Barney will be near free agency, Castro may be in the OF (or dealt). The young, middle infielders the Tribe would deal are all a few years away, and would be ready to fill in for the current guys (hopefully) by the time they are playoff contenders.

They definitely could use some pitching though, agree there. Hoynes opined about Salzaar as being a guy that the Cubs could interested in and would make sense. Wouldn't want to part with him for a rental but may have to if you really want Garza...who I really like but agree, the rental issue makes him less appealing...

Would like to get Garza, even as just a rental, but would label Lindor and Salazar, the best hitter and best pitcher in the system, as untouchable for such a move.

My offer would start with IF Ronny Rod and SP Cody Anderson, then throw in a near ready bullpen arm (Langwell, Guilmet, Tejeda) and/or a very young projectable prospect (Lovegrove, Hamrick, McClure, not Lugo though). Not enough? Too much?

Tondo wrote:Would like to get Garza, even as just a rental, but would label Lindor and Salazar, the best hitter and best pitcher in the system, as untouchable for such a move.

My offer would start with IF Ronny Rod and SP Cody Anderson, then throw in a near ready bullpen arm (Langwell, Guilmet, Tejeda) and/or a very young projectable prospect (Lovegrove, Hamrick, McClure, not Lugo though). Not enough? Too much?

I honestly think the Cubs will deal Matt Garza soon. That said, who ever gets him likely gives up some international pool money. I think RRod, Naquin, Guilmet and about $1M in international funds would get it done. To be honest I'd like to see the Tribe target a controllable SP: either Bud Norris or Jeff Samardjida and try to get a RP or two as well.

Any help we get should include an obligation to the Tribe for more than this year. No rentals!

The reality is that - Detroit is a superior team. You can bet they will be getting bull pen help.

Frankly, how they ever lose is beyond me. It requires an anomaly in their SP like today - and a break down of their BP like we saw today. IMO they will fix the BP - and the anomalies of their SP will be infrequent.

Bearcatbob wrote:Any help we get should include an obligation to the Tribe for more than this year. No rentals!

The reality is that - Detroit is a superior team. You can bet they will be getting bull pen help.

Frankly, how they ever lose is beyond me. It requires an anomaly in their SP like today - and a break down of their BP like we saw today. IMO they will fix the BP - and the anomalies of their SP will be infrequent.

Bob

I completely agree, the Tribe needs much more than the Tigers. Give them a stud closer and it changes the dynamic of that team. That said, IF the Tribe went out and did something like...

It would certainly change the Indians Pitching Staff and create a surplus of arms in the pen for the Tribe to deal at will. IF the Tribe is serious about contending they need to make bold moves, but also focus on the long term. Each of these moves would do just that.

homerawayfromhome wrote:BobI completely agree, the Tribe needs much more than the Tigers. Give them a stud closer and it changes the dynamic of that team. That said, IF the Tribe went out and did something like...

It would certainly change the Indians Pitching Staff and create a surplus of arms in the pen for the Tribe to deal at will. IF the Tribe is serious about contending they need to make bold moves, but also focus on the long term. Each of these moves would do just that.

Long term I think Salazar is as good if not better than Norris, so "throwing in" Ramirez and Adams, two future MLB players is not the way I'd go. I know that this is the kind of deal that it takes to get a SP like Norris, but I would give Salazar a chance first in Cleveland before I'd trigger that kind of deal.

I'd think about the the one for Russell, because the Indians really need a reliable LHRP, but I would never give up this much for Cishek and Webb. Webb isn't really better then the likes of Shaw, Albers etc, so basically giving up Naquin, Wendle, Guilmet and a Top 100 pick for Cishek seems excessive

At this point in the season, it seems inconceivable that the Indians would not go with internal options for the bullpen such as: Joe Martinez, Matt Langwell, Scotty Barnes, David Huff, Preston Guilmet, Paolo Espino, Bryce Stowell, TJ House and/or Danny Salazar. Each of these guys have a chance to contribute. To what extent their success can be is no worse than some of the 'available' options in the trade market. Before making a "three for one" trade for a reliever, this could be how CA attacks the perceived issue..

Honestly, I'm not sure how realistic any of these deals are, but I think they offer perspective for what it could cost to get what the Tribe needs. I think I would do these deals BUT I'd also try to move Albers, Smith, Perez and DFA Hill. Overall, the whole point of this was to show the Tribe could add some nice pieces back, but it's gonna hurt. Some of the guys I propose in these deals I don't want to deal at all, but it is a reality & necessity to get the pieces you want in return.

GeronimoSon wrote:At this point in the season, it seems inconceivable that the Indians would not go with internal options for the bullpen such as: Joe Martinez, Matt Langwell, Scotty Barnes, David Huff, Preston Guilmet, Paolo Espino, Bryce Stowell, TJ House and/or Danny Salazar. Each of these guys have a chance to contribute. To what extent their success can be is no worse than some of the 'available' options in the trade market. Before making a "three for one" trade for a reliever, this could be how CA attacks the perceived issue..

This is what the Tribe has done in the past...

Btw, I think you can add CCLee and Blake Wood to the list of potential bullpen arms. I tend to believe this is a good time to try to re-work the bullpen IF the price is right. Regardless, they have to make a cpl moves, IMO. Maybe they add a SP and slide Kazmir back to the pen to limit his innings, that could be a possibility. That would essentially be a two-in-one type move.

This is poorly timed after yesterday's game, I realize, but I cannot think of a player that fans and the media have overrated in recent years in Cleveland more than Michael Brantley. Perhaps because he is the last piece of the CC deal, but to me he is a spot that can be upgraded in the right deal. His value as a prospect was as a speedy leadoff hitter that can hit for average and steal bases. He has proven after 3.5 years that he isn't really good at anything. .275 doesn't cut it with little power and he doesn't impact the game with speed or defense. He is what he is and is a spot where we can improve the lineup. He doesn't deserve the nickname "Dr. Smooth" or a spot in the middle of the order.

GeronimoSon wrote:At this point in the season, it seems inconceivable that the Indians would not go with internal options for the bullpen such as: Joe Martinez, Matt Langwell, Scotty Barnes, David Huff, Preston Guilmet, Paolo Espino, Bryce Stowell, TJ House and/or Danny Salazar. Each of these guys have a chance to contribute. To what extent their success can be is no worse than some of the 'available' options in the trade market. Before making a "three for one" trade for a reliever, this could be how CA attacks the perceived issue..

David Huff is tearing it up for the Scranton/Wilkes-Barre RailRiders. Closer of the future.

ChadS17 wrote:This is poorly timed after yesterday's game, I realize, but I cannot think of a player that fans and the media have overrated in recent years in Cleveland more than Michael Brantley. Perhaps because he is the last piece of the CC deal, but to me he is a spot that can be upgraded in the right deal. His value as a prospect was as a speedy leadoff hitter that can hit for average and steal bases. He has proven after 3.5 years that he isn't really good at anything. .275 doesn't cut it with little power and he doesn't impact the game with speed or defense. He is what he is and is a spot where we can improve the lineup. He doesn't deserve the nickname "Dr. Smooth" or a spot in the middle of the order.

Brantley has been better than Bourn since the start of the 2011 season. Sure Bourn has more speed/steals but OBP are nearly the same and Brantley has just been overall a better hitter/offensive player (though not by a lot). Bourn is the better overall player thanks to his speed/defense...then again, he's also 4 years older than Brantley...

I've been critical of Brantley in the past but he's been very solid the last 2 years. Sure you want more power from LF so I definitely could see Brantley moved at some point but he's been every bit as good as advertised. I think some people just had some outrageous expectations for him. I feel like some people felt he was the next Kenny Lofton, and since he's not he must suck. Yet people seem to think Bourn is as good as Kenny Lofton....when he's really no better than Brantley and not even close to on par with Lofton.

Also, not sure why you have a problem with Brantley in the middle of the order. With men on base he's hitting .341 with a .381 OBP, .473 SLG, and .854 OPS. Sounds like a guy I want in there. Also hitting .367 with .405 OBP, .500 SLG, and .905 OPS with RISP. With 2 outs and runners in scoring position? Hitting .406 with a .457 OBP, .625 SLG, and 1.082 OPS (20th best OPS in baseball, min 25 PAs).

I mean, sure I'd like some more power but the guy just flat out hits with guys on base. Put him in the middle with guys like Bourn, Kipnis, etc in front of him and he'll drive in runs. He definitely has had some ups and downs this year though. Then again, so has pretty much everyone in the lineup. Personally wouldn't mind seeing him slot into the 3-hole more (with Bourn-Kip in front of him).

GeronimoSon wrote:At this point in the season, it seems inconceivable that the Indians would not go with internal options for the bullpen such as: Joe Martinez, Matt Langwell, Scotty Barnes, David Huff, Preston Guilmet, Paolo Espino, Bryce Stowell, TJ House and/or Danny Salazar. Each of these guys have a chance to contribute. To what extent their success can be is no worse than some of the 'available' options in the trade market. Before making a "three for one" trade for a reliever, this could be how CA attacks the perceived issue..

This is what the Tribe has done in the past...

Btw, I think you can add CCLee and Blake Wood to the list of potential bullpen arms. I tend to believe this is a good time to try to re-work the bullpen IF the price is right. Regardless, they have to make a cpl moves, IMO. Maybe they add a SP and slide Kazmir back to the pen to limit his innings, that could be a possibility. That would essentially be a two-in-one type move.

+1

Yeah.. your mention of the various possibilities for moving guys within the starting and relieving ranks makes some sense. Reworking the pen and coming out with a more effective and efficient group may be the best course of action...

Regarding Brantley.. Come on. the guy hit TWO home runs !.. (just kidding.. it was a great day for him)..

David Huff meh..

Guilmet was just promoted to the Indians.. the corresponding move was Marson to the 60 day DL.. So, another pen arm from the minors is being given an opportunity.. Eventually, one of these guys are gonna go out there and Joe Martinez their chance....

ChadS17 wrote:This is poorly timed after yesterday's game, I realize, but I cannot think of a player that fans and the media have overrated in recent years in Cleveland more than Michael Brantley. Perhaps because he is the last piece of the CC deal, but to me he is a spot that can be upgraded in the right deal. His value as a prospect was as a speedy leadoff hitter that can hit for average and steal bases. He has proven after 3.5 years that he isn't really good at anything. .275 doesn't cut it with little power and he doesn't impact the game with speed or defense. He is what he is and is a spot where we can improve the lineup. He doesn't deserve the nickname "Dr. Smooth" or a spot in the middle of the order.

Brantley has been better than Bourn since the start of the 2011 season. Sure Bourn has more speed/steals but OBP are nearly the same and Brantley has just been overall a better hitter/offensive player (though not by a lot). Bourn is the better overall player thanks to his speed/defense...then again, he's also 4 years older than Brantley...

I've been critical of Brantley in the past but he's been very solid the last 2 years. Sure you want more power from LF so I definitely could see Brantley moved at some point but he's been every bit as good as advertised. I think some people just had some outrageous expectations for him. I feel like some people felt he was the next Kenny Lofton, and since he's not he must suck. Yet people seem to think Bourn is as good as Kenny Lofton....when he's really no better than Brantley and not even close to on par with Lofton.

Also, not sure why you have a problem with Brantley in the middle of the order. With men on base he's hitting .341 with a .381 OBP, .473 SLG, and .854 OPS. Sounds like a guy I want in there. Also hitting .367 with .405 OBP, .500 SLG, and .905 OPS with RISP. With 2 outs and runners in scoring position? Hitting .406 with a .457 OBP, .625 SLG, and 1.082 OPS (20th best OPS in baseball, min 25 PAs).

I mean, sure I'd like some more power but the guy just flat out hits with guys on base. Put him in the middle with guys like Bourn, Kipnis, etc in front of him and he'll drive in runs. He definitely has had some ups and downs this year though. Then again, so has pretty much everyone in the lineup. Personally wouldn't mind seeing him slot into the 3-hole more (with Bourn-Kip in front of him).

On a good team, Brantley hits seventh or eighth. And probably wouldn't mind him there but unfortunately we don't have the other players to fill in the middle of the order. Brantley would look great in the Tigers lineup in left field in the lower third. Can't argue with stats, but subjectively, Bourn impacts the game much more than Brantley does. Brantley would not get 4/$48 mil as a free agent.

FWIW, Matt Garza and the Cubs have kicked around the idea of an extension.

I still think the Cubs will try to acquire more International pool money. Word is they are now in on Jen-Ho Tseng, but he could cost more than $1.5M (some rumors he wants $2M) and the Cubs could run the risk of hitting the hardest penalty phase next yr. The Rangers already have and will be limited to signings of $250K, there is a very real likelihood the Cubs will as well IF Tseng costs as much as rumored. The biggest factor, IMO is the Cubs are likely to have a top 5 pool next yr. that's a lot of money to throw away in one signing (Tseng), bc signing him would exceed their max pool limits. Honestly, it makes sense for the Rangers bc they will likely have one of the smallest pools anyway. The Cubs will likely end up trading away a large chunk of their pool money, that limits their return, IMHO.

ChadS17 wrote:This is poorly timed after yesterday's game, I realize, but I cannot think of a player that fans and the media have overrated in recent years in Cleveland more than Michael Brantley. Perhaps because he is the last piece of the CC deal, but to me he is a spot that can be upgraded in the right deal. His value as a prospect was as a speedy leadoff hitter that can hit for average and steal bases. He has proven after 3.5 years that he isn't really good at anything. .275 doesn't cut it with little power and he doesn't impact the game with speed or defense. He is what he is and is a spot where we can improve the lineup. He doesn't deserve the nickname "Dr. Smooth" or a spot in the middle of the order.

Brantley has been better than Bourn since the start of the 2011 season. Sure Bourn has more speed/steals but OBP are nearly the same and Brantley has just been overall a better hitter/offensive player (though not by a lot). Bourn is the better overall player thanks to his speed/defense...then again, he's also 4 years older than Brantley...

I've been critical of Brantley in the past but he's been very solid the last 2 years. Sure you want more power from LF so I definitely could see Brantley moved at some point but he's been every bit as good as advertised. I think some people just had some outrageous expectations for him. I feel like some people felt he was the next Kenny Lofton, and since he's not he must suck. Yet people seem to think Bourn is as good as Kenny Lofton....when he's really no better than Brantley and not even close to on par with Lofton.

Also, not sure why you have a problem with Brantley in the middle of the order. With men on base he's hitting .341 with a .381 OBP, .473 SLG, and .854 OPS. Sounds like a guy I want in there. Also hitting .367 with .405 OBP, .500 SLG, and .905 OPS with RISP. With 2 outs and runners in scoring position? Hitting .406 with a .457 OBP, .625 SLG, and 1.082 OPS (20th best OPS in baseball, min 25 PAs).

I mean, sure I'd like some more power but the guy just flat out hits with guys on base. Put him in the middle with guys like Bourn, Kipnis, etc in front of him and he'll drive in runs. He definitely has had some ups and downs this year though. Then again, so has pretty much everyone in the lineup. Personally wouldn't mind seeing him slot into the 3-hole more (with Bourn-Kip in front of him).

On a good team, Brantley hits seventh or eighth. And probably wouldn't mind him there but unfortunately we don't have the other players to fill in the middle of the order. Brantley would look great in the Tigers lineup in left field in the lower third. Can't argue with stats, but subjectively, Bourn impacts the game much more than Brantley does. Brantley would not get 4/$48 mil as a free agent.

Agree he won't get 4/$48M as a free agent..then again, neither would Bourn have after his 26 year old season. And depends on the team with Brantley and where he hits. Sure on some teams he'd hit 7th or 8th but would have to be one hell of a lineup. He'd hit leadoff or 2nd on a lot of teams. Heck, Andy Dirks has hit leadoff or 2nd 35 times this year for the Tiggers and Brantley is better than him. Last year he hit there 40+ times.

ChadS17 wrote:This is poorly timed after yesterday's game, I realize, but I cannot think of a player that fans and the media have overrated in recent years in Cleveland more than Michael Brantley. Perhaps because he is the last piece of the CC deal, but to me he is a spot that can be upgraded in the right deal. His value as a prospect was as a speedy leadoff hitter that can hit for average and steal bases. He has proven after 3.5 years that he isn't really good at anything. .275 doesn't cut it with little power and he doesn't impact the game with speed or defense. He is what he is and is a spot where we can improve the lineup. He doesn't deserve the nickname "Dr. Smooth" or a spot in the middle of the order.

I respect the opinion, but I will politely disagree. I'm not gonna try to pose an argument, but he is certainly the type of player who holds more value than meets the eye. Look up his BA with runners in scoring position and also look up his monthly stats from the last couple years. He has been the ONE and ONLY player on this team that has consistently performed day in and day out. Having players that don't slump for extended periods of time (Reynolds, ACab, even Kipnis and Swisher) is crucial when your trying to fight for a playoff spot. He will produce when nobody else does.

Its starting to feel like the winter meetings again with all this Tribe trade talk heating up.

The guy who does the chats on mlbtr suggests the Cubs would be looking at any of our three AAA pitchers (Bauer, Carrasco, Salazar) in a deal for Garza. Mentions Paulino as one of the only position players that would strike interest for the Cubs if we were willing to let him go. Its good to hear his prospect status has not been damaged at all by his poor April/May.

Its nice to know that they are not targeting depth, but targeting high upside upgrades. Gallardo and Garza are the only two really big names that could realistically be traded, and we have been linked to them, and only them. Unfortunately, Gallardo (who I used to love) could turn into another Ubaldo, and Garza could throw less than 250 pitches before being put on the DL. I'm starting to trust Antonetti's philosophy and judgment though.

BrianM wrote:Its starting to feel like the winter meetings again with all this Tribe trade talk heating up.

The guy who does the chats on mlbtr suggests the Cubs would be looking at any of our three AAA pitchers (Bauer, Carrasco, Salazar) in a deal for Garza. Mentions Paulino as one of the only position players that would strike interest for the Cubs if we were willing to let him go. Its good to hear his prospect status has not been damaged at all by his poor April/May.

Its nice to know that they are not targeting depth, but targeting high upside upgrades. Gallardo and Garza are the only two really big names that could realistically be traded, and we have been linked to them, and only them. Unfortunately, Gallardo (who I used to love) could turn into another Ubaldo, and Garza could throw less than 250 pitches before being put on the DL. I'm starting to trust Antonetti's philosophy and judgment though.

I agree on Gallardo and Garza. Word is the Cubs price is way high on Garza too. I'd rather see them hold on to what they have and fortify the pen instead of buy, just to buy. However, I think Bud Norris would be a nice add. He's not an ace by any means but he has pitched better than Gallardo. But a bullpen arm or two like.... Ryan Webb, Steve Cishek, Jesse Crain (IF healthy), Tom Wilhelmson, Kevin Gregg, Jose Veras, Mike Dunn, Oliver Perez, Charlie Furbush, Glenn Perkins, Wesley Wright and Joe Thatcher would go a long way in solidifying the bullpen.

Personally, I think the Tribe has to be both buyers and sellers. Unless Joe Smith is willing to resign I think the Tribe should look to move him. I also think they have to look long term too, *listening* to offers for ACab, Masterson and even Chris Perez (bc no matter what they are selling low on him).

homerawayfromhome wrote:I agree on Gallardo and Garza. Word is the Cubs price is way high on Garza too. I'd rather see them hold on to what they have and fortify the pen instead of buy, just to buy. However, I think Bud Norris would be a nice add. He's not an ace by any means but he has pitched better than Gallardo. But a bullpen arm or two like.... Ryan Webb, Steve Cishek, Jesse Crain (IF healthy), Tom Wilhelmson, Kevin Gregg, Jose Veras, Mike Dunn, Oliver Perez, Charlie Furbush, Glenn Perkins, Wesley Wright and Joe Thatcher would go a long way in solidifying the bullpen.

Personally, I think the Tribe has to be both buyers and sellers. Unless Joe Smith is willing to resign I think the Tribe should look to move him. I also think they have to look long term too, *listening* to offers for ACab, Masterson and even Chris Perez (bc no matter what they are selling low on him).

I agree on the buy and sell. Tribe probably doesn't move Perez this summer but really don't see how they keep him this winter. They are looking at a payroll over $80M next year if they keep him...and that's if they add no one while letting Ubaldo, Myers, Reynolds, Albers, Smith, Hill, and Raburn all walk. Big raises coming for some guys including Masterson, Bourn, etc. Even Swisher gets $2M more. Tribe really backloaded their deals this winter. Can't have a $10M closer.

Another guy I'd look to move is Stubbs. I know his speed and defense are very good (understatement) but offense is still lacking, especially for a corner guy. Throw in that he's making nearly $3M and will only get more expensive in arby and could be a guy to move and give the Tribe some spending money. He fits better in CF with his bat and lots of teams could be looking for one. If a team absolutely wanted Brantley I'd consider him too but would need to be a very good return.

Agree on Garza, a guy I want but asking price does seem a bit high. I'd be willing to move Paulino but not with one of our AAA pitchers. I don't see Garza getting more than Greinke got for the Brewers last year personally. Think if you include a AAA starter then Paulino would be off the table and a lower infield spec would be included, especially if you included some IFA money. Going to be interesting though, not a lot of teams look like definite sellers now so very likely will have to overpay in this market. Garza is a guy I'd love to sign long-term too...but looking at more than Edwin Jackson and Tribe can't afford that unless they move Perez and someone like Stubbs, and even then it's not too likely.

I think I have mistakenly stated, "the Tribe could only trade away their remaining smallest international bonus pools totaling near $1M." That is not correct, the Tribe could trade away any of their four bonus pools including their largest about $1.9M. The Tribe could also swap this pool for a player and a lesser pool amount. The Tribe can only trade away half of their original bonus pool allotment of $3,636,900. They have reportedly spent $1,450,000 or slightly less than half of their total pool. So basically, the Tribe could trade their largest pool allotment of about $1.9M in almost any trade.

"Another guy I'd look to move is Stubbs. I know his speed and defense are very good (understatement) but offense is still lacking, especially for a corner guy. Throw in that he's making nearly $3M and will only get more expensive in arby and could be a guy to move and give the Tribe some spending money. He fits better in CF with his bat and lots of teams could be looking for one. If a team absolutely wanted Brantley I'd consider him too but would need to be a very good return."

I think Stubbs has been a great asset for this team. I would like one of our stats wizards to define exactly what his contributions have been.

That said - if we did trade him for something - Rayburn would be a good replacement - assuming we locked up Rayburn going forward. As of now - who other than Rayburn would replace Stubbs?

Bearcatbob wrote:"Another guy I'd look to move is Stubbs. I know his speed and defense are very good (understatement) but offense is still lacking, especially for a corner guy. Throw in that he's making nearly $3M and will only get more expensive in arby and could be a guy to move and give the Tribe some spending money. He fits better in CF with his bat and lots of teams could be looking for one. If a team absolutely wanted Brantley I'd consider him too but would need to be a very good return."

I think Stubbs has been a great asset for this team. I would like one of our stats wizards to define exactly what his contributions have been.

That said - if we did trade him for something - Rayburn would be a good replacement - assuming we locked up Rayburn going forward. As of now - who other than Rayburn would replace Stubbs?

If the Tribe got Schierholtz from the Cubs they'd make a pretty good pair. He's having a breakout yr as a FT player and is affordable and under contract for one more yr.

Bearcatbob wrote:"Another guy I'd look to move is Stubbs. I know his speed and defense are very good (understatement) but offense is still lacking, especially for a corner guy. Throw in that he's making nearly $3M and will only get more expensive in arby and could be a guy to move and give the Tribe some spending money. He fits better in CF with his bat and lots of teams could be looking for one. If a team absolutely wanted Brantley I'd consider him too but would need to be a very good return."

I think Stubbs has been a great asset for this team. I would like one of our stats wizards to define exactly what his contributions have been.

That said - if we did trade him for something - Rayburn would be a good replacement - assuming we locked up Rayburn going forward. As of now - who other than Rayburn would replace Stubbs?

Santana!!!

Short term obviously Raburn can replace him. Swisher could always move back out to RF too this year.

Stubb's value comes from his speed/defense. Been a plus defender in RF and plus baserunner. Sadly he's actually having a better year than Bourn now. Higher OPS and ever so slightly higher BR WAR (both 1.3, Stubbs ranks 49th, Bourn 50th among OFers). Fangraphs doesn't like him quiet as much as he's only at a 1.1 WAR. Again, his value comes solely from his fielding and speed. Still a below average hitter. Does have some redeeming qualities though. Has hit lefties pretty well this year (done so in the past too). And hit well with RISP this year. Still...think he could have more value to another club. Not saying you 'have' to deal him. He's actually done a good job switching leagues...which is supposively so hard. Has 10 steals and has yet to be caught....unlike Bourn who is 12 for 18.

In a perfect world, whether Stubbs is with Cleveland or another team, he's being platooned with a guy that hits righties well. Someone like a DeJesus, Schierholtz, Duda, Schafer, etc. Cubs and Mets could both maybe use an OFer...maybe you dangle Stubbs in Garza talks? Obviously would need way more but he'd make a nice platoon with DeJesus. His power would play well in that park too.

EDIT:Another guy to consider for replacing Stubbs if he were dealt....Yan Gomes. Obviously Gomes wouldn't play RF, but Swisher could move back out to RF, Santana to 1B (or DH) with Gomes catching. Wouldn't do that every day but could be a way to see if Gomes will potentially be able to be an everyday catcher. Get him in there 3-4 times a week, see how his bat handles it.

Last edited by Hermie13 on Wed Jul 10, 2013 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Bearcatbob wrote:"Another guy I'd look to move is Stubbs. I know his speed and defense are very good (understatement) but offense is still lacking, especially for a corner guy. Throw in that he's making nearly $3M and will only get more expensive in arby and could be a guy to move and give the Tribe some spending money. He fits better in CF with his bat and lots of teams could be looking for one. If a team absolutely wanted Brantley I'd consider him too but would need to be a very good return."

I think Stubbs has been a great asset for this team. I would like one of our stats wizards to define exactly what his contributions have been.

That said - if we did trade him for something - Rayburn would be a good replacement - assuming we locked up Rayburn going forward. As of now - who other than Rayburn would replace Stubbs?

If the Tribe got Schierholtz from the Cubs they'd make a pretty good pair. He's having a breakout yr as a FT player and is affordable and under contract for one more yr.

Schierholtz would make a good pairing with Stubbs. Not sure the Cubs would move him though as they do have him for another year. Wouldn't mind snagging him, but Raburn is actually hitting very well against righties this year, not much worse than Schierholtz (.875 vs .866 OPS). Wish we'd see a platoon of Raburn and Stubbs for the time being. Raburn very likely won't be able to keep up this pace against righties but I say ride him while he's hot.

Waiting for Next Year picked up this bit from Buster Olney today. This is going to rehash a discussion from this past offseason, and one I'm dreading as it will also rehash the convoluted 7 team deals where the Indians rape the other 6 teams...

GoTribe028 wrote:Waiting for Next Year picked up this bit from Buster Olney today. This is going to rehash a discussion from this past offseason, and one I'm dreading as it will also rehash the convoluted 7 dream deals where the Indians rape the other 6 teams...

GoTribe028 wrote:Waiting for Next Year picked up this bit from Buster Olney today. This is going to rehash a discussion from this past offseason, and one I'm dreading as it will also rehash the convoluted 7 dream deals where the Indians rape the other 6 teams...

It would be ironic IF the Tribe acquired Michael Wacha IF such a deal took place.

The Cardinals make a lot of sense as far as trade partners. Indians possibly free up some salary as well as acquire potential starting pitching. Also would make sense in the event the Indians deal Salazar or Carrasco for example to bring another arm in. (Note, I do not wish the Indians deal Salazar).

GoTribe028 wrote:Waiting for Next Year picked up this bit from Buster Olney today. This is going to rehash a discussion from this past offseason, and one I'm dreading as it will also rehash the convoluted 7 dream deals where the Indians rape the other 6 teams...

It would be ironic IF the Tribe acquired Michael Wacha IF such a deal took place.

The Cardinals make a lot of sense as far as trade partners. Indians possibly free up some salary as well as acquire potential starting pitching. Also would make sense in the event the Indians deal Salazar or Carrasco for example to bring another arm in. (Note, I do not wish the Indians deal Salazar).

By some reports the Cards have made Wacha (and Tavaras) untouchable this summer. May or may not be true. Not sure even if he was available if the Cards would move him for Asdrubal now. He's been struggling a lot so value isn't where it was this winter. Think the Tribe would really have to bomb in July for Asdrubal to be moved this summer too. This winter I think we'll see him potentially dealt though, but still have a shot at the division or even a wild card right now.